Can't speak for others... but I generally pay for a few streaming services at a time. I find a lot of the UX just poor to very bad. I will favor those with shows that I watch. I still torrent the shows themselves as it's easier (for me) to do that then to deal with the various apps on my Shield (they're still there, as my SO seems to use them for random watching).
The networks can still track (to some extent) what shows are popular as torrents, and use that to inform their other advertising efforts. A break out (good) show may show indicators on torrents from word of mouth outside their network, and they can then feature that show in their banner areas.
These aren't likely "profit" directly, but they are and can be factors. Another point is loyalty from those who are able to pay, when they are able to pay. Assuming prohibitive costs are what is mainly keeping people from paying for the content.
They seed and download their own works on bittorrent, then send "scare emails" demanding payment to any ISP with IPs they connect to for forwarding to the customer. A nontrivial number of confused or scared customers pay.
There are more indirect ways, but that is certainly the direct way they financially profit.
These comments are deceptive. Yes, this is how LLMs work, but that doesn't mean they only repeat things they have seen before. LLMs are capable of following instructions to construct new words in any language they know, words never seen before.
I've seen it being dumb in maths or real world problems. But as a large language models, they understand and speak languages fine, and even mistakes they make look like mistakes humans who are not natives in the language would make.
We may as well say that when we speak, we are just predicting words we have trained on. I don't see how these models are worse than people in that regard.
The general knowledge and thinking of these models are surely limited. But seeing GPT-4 go from text only input to text with images, I think it is very possible to break the barriers very soon.
Ok, since you called out the gp comment as 'deceptive', I in turn am going to call out your comment (and others like it) as delusional, and point to specific places in your comment that exhibit this state of delusion (about LLMs).
> they understand and speak languages fine
No, they neither 'understand' nor 'speak' languages. The first word here is the more delusional, they have no understanding of languages. They have simply generated a model of the language. And they do not 'speak' the language they have modeled; they generate text in that language. Speaking generally implies an active intelligence; there is no intelligence behind an LLM. There is simply a machine generating (wholly derivative) output text from input text.
> We may as well say that when we speak, we are just predicting words we have trained on
This is the delusion, commonly being repeated, that humans themselves are only LLMs. This is a dangerous delusion, in my view, and one that has no evidence behind it. It is only a supposition, and a sterile and nihilistic one in my view.
> The general knowledge and thinking of these models are surely limited [...] I think it is very possible to break the barriers very soon
The limitations are fundamental to LLMs. LLMs have no general knowledge and LLMs don't do any 'thinking'. Your understanding of what they are doing is in grave error, and that error is based on a personification of the machine. An error coming from the delusion that because they generate 'natural' language they are operating similarly to us (false and addressed above). They are never going to break the limits because they have never started to transcend those limits in the first place, nor can they. They don't and will never 'think' or 'reason'.
Kinopoisk and Amediateka (legal places to watch content) grew a lot before 2022. Netflix launch there was a success too. Now there's no Netflix and shows are being pulled off Kinopoisk.
I guess there's not a lot of paid content in Iraq too.
I think on macOS programs are able to store data "inside" themselves, because .app files are just folders. They usually shouldn't put stuff in Library.
That's wrong, of course they should put stuff in the ~/Library if necessary. That's why if you update an app it just replaces the whole .app directory, and also if you uninstall something and then install it again all your settings will still be there.
Many drivers do not read the passengers' comments on the order. Anyone who took a second to read this comment would've understood that there is something fishy here.
https://x.com/platoff/status/1737142050603086281